Scott Lloyd whines about new dangers of unregulated truth.

[_harmony]

My sincerest apologies for interrupting your echo chamber by expressing dissent over GP's thoughtless and insulting post. I'll try to remember that reminders about civility are unwelcome here the next time I get the strange idea that debate is welcome.

Ya know, ttribe, I haven't gotten into the debate on this thread (yes, I've read all 10 pages, though, in case you tell me to go read the thread like you have several other times to others on the thread already), but I object to your description, which I bolded in the above paragraph.

You claim that GP was insulting and thoughtless to Scott and/or his son or LDS parents or yourself, and you don't see how you have insulted us here, with this descriptor?

This board is the wild wild west. This isn't MAD, where you get to say whatever you want and the critics are muzzled. We're delighted whenever the pilgrims (that would be you) descend upon us unsuspecting savages (that would be some of us).

We're not always the most appropriate or civil, it's true... but it's not out of the ordinary for me to have to point out the inappropriateness or incivility of my fellow church members when they come here and post things like "echo chamber" to describe our home. Echo Chamber? You have 10 pages of assorted comments from several difference worldviews, and you call this an Echo Chamber? Do you have any idea what an Echo Chamber really is?

If you expect civil discussion, then model civil discussion. You opened the ball when, in your first post on this thread, you snidely called GP a "class act". We all knew it was an insult. We knew you were being sarcastic, but no one called you on it, because we were being polite... modeling civil discussion, as it were.

Then you went further, and essentially called KimberlyAnn stupid, with your "Furthermore, we are talking about a 12-yr. old...you realize that?" Did you honestly think KA didn't know what she was talking about, or were you (more likely) trying to put her down by insulting her intelligence? Again, not civil, not even close to civil. But our moderators didn't step in and neither did anyone else on the thread. We're kinda free spirits here and allow people, even you, to be uncivil.

But you weren't done! You then take on RayA, with another "Classy indeed". Again, this was not civil, ttribe. And it gets worse, with this comment, again to RayA: "and if you set aside your bitterness... " Bitterness? You comment about someone's bitterness and you don't see that as uncivil?

That was just on the first page of the thread.

It embarrasses me, as a member of the LDS church (with all the same outward trappings as you), when church members demand that others behave better than we do ourselves. Don't demand a civil tone from others when you are not willing to impose the same demand on your own tone. It makes us look bad.





.

[_TAK]

TT we do appreciate you sidestepping DCPs call to boycott us though..

[_harmony]

TT we do appreciate you sidestepping DCPs call to boycott us though..

Oh brother. Dan's still around. Or else his ghost is. Otherwise, how would he know when we're making fun of apologists?

[_ttribe]

Ya know, ttribe, I haven't gotten into the debate on this thread (yes, I've read all 10 pages, though, in case you tell me to go read the thread like you have several other times to others on the thread already), but I object to your description, which I bolded in the above paragraph.

You claim that GP was insulting and thoughtless to Scott and/or his son or LDS parents or yourself, and you don't see how you have insulted us here, with this descriptor?

This board is the wild wild west. This isn't MAD, where you get to say whatever you want and the critics are muzzled. We're delighted whenever the pilgrims (that would be you) descend upon us unsuspecting savages (that would be some of us).

I've never used the "pilgrims" and "savages" descriptors, nor would I.

We're not always the most appropriate or civil, it's true... but it's not out of the ordinary for me to have to point out the inappropriateness or incivility of my fellow church members when they come here and post things like "echo chamber" to describe our home. Echo Chamber? You have 10 pages of assorted comments from several difference worldviews, and you call this an Echo Chamber? Do you have any idea what an Echo Chamber really is?

Okay...wait...let me get this straight...you accuse me of insulting Kimberly with my comment about the 12 year old, and you try to insult my intelligence about an Echo Chamber? I did explain what I meant by this just prior to your post here...in effect, it is my belief that this 10 pages was not "debate" at all...it was an effort to shout me down so that the status quo could be reached again (the Echo Chamber).

If you expect civil discussion, then model civil discussion. You opened the ball when, in your first post on this thread, you snidely called GP a "class act". We all knew it was an insult. We knew you were being sarcastic, but no one called you on it, because we were being polite... modeling civil discussion, as it were.

So, I respond to GP and I'm the one at fault for setting the tone? Nice.

Then you went further, and essentially called KimberlyAnn stupid, with your "Furthermore, we are talking about a 12-yr. old...you realize that?" Did you honestly think KA didn't know what she was talking about, or were you (more likely) trying to put her down by insulting her intelligence? Again, not civil, not even close to civil. But our moderators didn't step in and neither did anyone else on the thread. We're kinda free spirits here and allow people, even you, to be uncivil.

I never referred to KA as stupid. Nor did I intend to infer it. I was highlighting a key element of the discussion that I thought was being passed by.

But you weren't done! You then take on RayA, with another "Classy indeed". Again, this was not civil, ttribe. And it gets worse, with this comment, again to RayA: "and if you set aside your bitterness... " Bitterness? You comment about someone's bitterness and you don't see that as uncivil?

Unfortunately, Ray and I have some "history"...I do have some difficulty communicating with him.

That was just on the first page of the thread.

It embarrasses me, as a member of the LDS church (with all the same outward trappings as you), when church members demand that others behave better than we do ourselves. Don't demand a civil tone from others when you are not willing to impose the same demand on your own tone. It makes us look bad.

I'm sorry I embarrassed you. I do find it interesting how lacking in objectivity your evaluation of this thread is, but it's your prerogative. Several times people have said - "we wish more TBMs would come here"..."we welcome TBMS"....and then they/we get shouted down and driven away...just....like....this.

[_Ray A]

But you weren't done! You then take on RayA, with another "Classy indeed". Again, this was not civil, ttribe. And it gets worse, with this comment, again to RayA: "and if you set aside your bitterness... " Bitterness? You comment about someone's bitterness and you don't see that as uncivil?

Insults are the occasional reality of this board. We give, and we get. The "bitterness" comment was a diversion off the subject and onto me, which is more what bothered me. After all, I didn't lay out my family wares for comment. Scott did, and I doubt he'd be so naïve as to not at least consider it would be "fair game" here. DCP certainly is. He knows that whatever he posts on MAD is fair game here.

What actually bothered me more was the "do they speak English in Australia?" comment. That wasn't an insult to me, but to all Australians. What if I wrote a similar comment, "do they speak English in America?" I'm sure that would go down well here. Is there some kind of intellectual snobbery about Australia on ttribes' mind? In any case, at least DCP knows that we speak English here, and I couldn't imagine such a remark coming from him.

And as for the comment that this board is an "echo chamber", ttribe hasn't spent much time here, nor does he realise the diversity, and sometimes antagonistic diversity of opinion that exists here.

[_beastie]

What I found most interesting was the fact that it was my position being debated so hotly. It seems GP gets a pass for being...well, GP? Whereas, I have to spend 10 pages defending myself for commenting that I thought his comment was classless. I suspect, but don't know, that if I'd never said a thing about how crass his post was, there would have been six or seven verbal slaps on the back and some laughs and that's about it.

Well, at least you're admitting that we welcome debate now. ;)

Your position was being hotly debated because it seemed, at least to me, that you were taking an extreme position and that extreme position forced you to adopt other equally extreme positions - like the one I keep referring to, in which you assert that simply stating that one hopes the children of bigots grow up to reject their parents' bigotry is inappropriate interference.

GP said other crass things, and had you focused on those, instead, it wouldn't have prompted this debate. What prompted the debate was your odd focus. I still find it hard to believe that you truly would find it inappropriate for someone to say "I hope the children of bigots grow up to reject their parents' bigotry" or that you would find it inappropriate for someone to say "I hope the children of anti-mormons grow up to reject their parents' anti-mormonism". People keep challenging you because the unsoundness of that position is obvious, and it does seem like you're being forced to adopt that position in order to avoid the charge of hypocrisy. You insist that this is your genuine stance, however, so I will respect that - but your assertion that this is your genuine position makes me want to challenge it even more, to see just how far you will take it.

Do you think it's inappropriate for me to hope that the children of fanatical jihadists will grow up to reject their parents' teachings? Cuz, you know, they might grow up and strap on a bomb, otherwise. But is the parent/child relationship so sacrosanct that I can't make such a comment without disrespecting the parent/child relationship and entering on a slippery slope?

You know my exhusband's father used to "whip" him with a belt on his legs. Very common in the south, actually. My exhusband used to have welts on his legs from those whippings. Yet his father would never call that "abuse" and would get angry if someone else accused him of abuse. If you think it was abuse, and think that warranted intervention, you have put your foot on the slippery slope. Where will it stop?? How dare you interfere with the parent/child relationship?

Revering the parent/child relationship to that extent is starting to smack a bit of a fetish, one in which the child is the property of the parent, who has the right to do whatever they please in that sacrosanct relationship.

Several times people have said - "we wish more TBMs would come here"..."we welcome TBMS"....and then they/we get shouted down and driven away...just....like....this.

You're not being shouted down and driven away. You're being asked to defend your position.

[_Yoda]

What I found most interesting was the fact that it was my position being debated so hotly. It seems GP gets a pass for being...well, GP? Whereas, I have to spend 10 pages defending myself for commenting that I thought his comment was classless. I suspect, but don't know, that if I'd never said a thing about how crass his post was, there would have been six or seven verbal slaps on the back and some laughs and that's about it.

If you recall, I did defend you. I also agreed with you on the crassness of GP's remark.

I simply disagreed with your focus.

[_harmony]

I've never used the "pilgrims" and "savages" descriptors, nor would I.

Just getting into the Thanksgiving theme. That and I just finished a John Wayne film... pilgrim.

Okay...wait...let me get this straight...you accuse me of insulting Kimberly with my comment about the 12 year old, and you try to insult my intelligence about an Echo Chamber? I did explain what I meant by this just prior to your post here...in effect, it is my belief that this 10 pages was not "debate" at all...it was an effort to shout me down so that the status quo could be reached again (the Echo Chamber).

Debate? What debate? We discuss here. Debating is for high school. But you weren't debating or discussing, were you? Your opening salvo of "classy", then "you realize that?", then "class act", the "bitterness" was not the civil discussion you claim to want, was it? They were potshots at the people who entered the discussion, some of them quite personal. You insult the people here, then you escalate, then you complain that you're being fully engaged? You weren't shouted down; your points were engaged and counterarguments were offered. That you chose to engage in uncivil discussion yourself is well documented in your first post on this thread. And this won't be an echo chamber when you decide to leave (and you will decide to leave. This is a pretty mild thread so far, but the heat here gets pretty intense, and I doubt you will be able to stand up to it).

So, I respond to GP and I'm the one at fault for setting the tone? Nice.

No, you weren't nice. But we can deal with not nice here. We don't require nice here. I just think it's pretty lame that you demand nice, and your first post was definitely on the wrong side of the nice line.

I never referred to KA as stupid. Nor did I intend to infer it. I was highlighting a key element of the discussion that I thought was being passed by.

Then you might want to do a bit of self moderation, and think about what you say before you hit the Submit button. It came across as insulting.

Unfortunately, Ray and I have some "history"...I do have some difficulty communicating with him.

And you felt the need to let us all know this... why? On a thread where you are demanding civility?

I'm sorry I embarrassed you. I do find it interesting how lacking in objectivity your evaluation of this thread is, but it's your prerogative.

I'm not objective. Why would you think I was? This is my internet home; I object to it being described as an echo chamber, when it is full of people who represent several different world views, whose world views are openly discussed and welcomed, even those in diametric opposition to others' views here. Don't confuse us with MAD.

Several times people have said - "we wish more TBMs would come here"..."we welcome TBMS"....and then they/we get shouted down and driven away...just....like....this.

See? I knew you couldn't stick it out.

You weren't "shouted down". I've seen dogpiles; I've been on the bottom of dogpiles. You were not anywhere near that. You made a point; your point was dissected and discussed. You continued to discuss your point, and the other posters continued to discuss theirs. That's what we do here... discuss.

If you decide to leave, that's your perogative, but you were not "driven away". You choose to leave. We allow that here. You can choose to return. We also allow that here.

[_Ray A]

I'm sorry I embarrassed you. I do find it interesting how lacking in objectivity your evaluation of this thread is, but it's your prerogative. Several times people have said - "we wish more TBMs would come here"..."we welcome TBMS"....and then they/we get shouted down and driven away...just....like....this.

Cry me a river. I've occasionally been "hounded" here not only for pages, but for threads. I have sometimes reconsidered my views as a result of that opposition. So do spare me the tale of woe. Gaz has copped far more than you have, and BC, and both for far longer than you have in your brief visits. What it really amounts to is your individual mettle, which is what I warned you about on MAD if you ever decided to post here. You may recall.

[_Yoda]

I'm sorry I embarrassed you. I do find it interesting how lacking in objectivity your evaluation of this thread is, but it's your prerogative. Several times people have said - "we wish more TBMs would come here"..."we welcome TBMS"....and then they/we get shouted down and driven away...just....like....this.

Cry me a river. I've occasionally been "hounded" here not only for pages, but for threads. I have sometimes reconsidered my views as a result of that opposition. So do spare me the tale of woe. Gazelam has copped far more than you have, and BC, and both for far longer than you have in your brief visits. What it really amounts to is your individual mettle, which is what I warned you about on MAD if you ever decided to post here. You may recall.

Ray brings out a good point here. Gaz and BC have both endured their share of dogpiling, and yet, are both prominent posters here. I have gone the rounds with both of them, but have respect for both of them as well.

You have to understand, ttribe, that this board does work differently than MAD. Crassness, although I'm not particularly fond of it, is allowed here. Take a look at how the forums are organized. The Terrestrial Forum has more of a PG to PG13 rating, or "feel" to it. If the crassness here offends you, I suggest you completely stay away from the Telestial Forum, where it is no holds barred in terms of allowable insults and sexual innuendo.

The Celestial Forum may be a more comfortable forum for you to engage in. It is highly moderated, the topics are typically more scholarly and/or spiritual in nature, and it is a G-rated area. There are, actually some very good discussions going on there at the moment.

As a member of the Moderating Team here, I certainly do welcome you, and hope that you decide to stay.

If you decide to stay, however, you will not be given preferential treatment based on your Church membership(as MAD openly admits to doing). As Harmony previously indicated, MDB is more like the "Wild West".